Rumor: PS4 50% More Powerful Than Xbox 720
- Thread starter Sarah LeBoeuf
- Start date
4 and 8 Gigs of RAM. Are they crazy?
Game programmer have a hard time using more than 2Gigs because they keep doing this.
int p = &FooBar;
when they should be
long p = &FooBar;
Stupid programmers marring themselves to 32bit code FOREVER!
Rather than give me 8 Gigs of wasted Memory.
Give me 2 Gigs
on 4 chips
using Quad Channel Memory.
But NO we have to go with larger values, and ignore faster performance.
Game programmer have a hard time using more than 2Gigs because they keep doing this.
int p = &FooBar;
when they should be
long p = &FooBar;
Stupid programmers marring themselves to 32bit code FOREVER!
Rather than give me 8 Gigs of wasted Memory.
Give me 2 Gigs
on 4 chips
using Quad Channel Memory.
But NO we have to go with larger values, and ignore faster performance.
Oy, here we go again.
I'd like to believe that we're all aware by now that sheer processing power isn't necessarily the best measure of how a system will perform. That the various pipelines between the optical drive, graphics processor, RAM and so on are all capable of creating bottlenecks that potentially limit what the machine can throw onto your 1080p screen, and beyond that there's little reason to expect that the first generation of software is really going to capitalize on everything a new console is capable of. That we may see more improvement in the quality of games over time not in the system that's the most powerful, but in the one whose hardware is easier to design for...
...Before we get down to the business of speculating if one largely hypothetical set of specifications will prove superior to another largely hypothetical set of specs.
I'd like to believe that we're all aware by now that sheer processing power isn't necessarily the best measure of how a system will perform. That the various pipelines between the optical drive, graphics processor, RAM and so on are all capable of creating bottlenecks that potentially limit what the machine can throw onto your 1080p screen, and beyond that there's little reason to expect that the first generation of software is really going to capitalize on everything a new console is capable of. That we may see more improvement in the quality of games over time not in the system that's the most powerful, but in the one whose hardware is easier to design for...
...Before we get down to the business of speculating if one largely hypothetical set of specifications will prove superior to another largely hypothetical set of specs.
Here's a rumor for ya: The PS4 and XBox 720 will have 50% less backwards compatability. And 50% less common sense.
What most people will fail to realise however, is that the extra RAM the XBox has will, because of the PS4, be absolutely pointless. Why? Because developers making cross-platform games make it for the lowest common denominator. This is readily evidenced by practically every single game released in the last 4-5 years, ported from console to PC. PCs have much more RAM, significantly better GFX processing, yet apart from a tiny number of games that offer DX11 extras, all of these games are console ports.
As console ports, they have tiny maps, frequent load screens, often a checkpoint system in lieu of an actual save feature, shitty, blurry textures and so on. Thus, if in the next gen PS4 has 3 gigs GFX memory and XBox has 5 gigs, the XBox will have 2 gigs doing nothing whatsoever as the games would have been developed for PS4 whose technical limitation means the game has to be designed to use no more than 3GB of meshes and textures for its maps and models.
Frankly I'm starting to believe Yahtzee's view on the futility of console wars. A single unified architecture, with competition in the form of UI, value-added extras, platform-unique exclusives, etc is what's best for the consumer, not multiple devices that split the community and allow no crossing over.
What does it matter which console is more powerful? The games are just going to be rolled back to the weaker of the two. Look at this gen. Games are tooled for the inferior x-box, then ported over to the ps3.
I'm instantly reminded of this.
No, do your history, specs have never been an important factor in the overall value of a console, even back when they had a significant affect on graphics and gameplay. The Atari Jaguar was of course a commercial failure because it had about six crappy games that nobody wanted to play. If specs really mattered Nintendo wouldn't still be in business and all the current consoles would be obsolete relics.
So, heresay or not, I couldn't care less about this.
No, do your history, specs have never been an important factor in the overall value of a console, even back when they had a significant affect on graphics and gameplay. The Atari Jaguar was of course a commercial failure because it had about six crappy games that nobody wanted to play. If specs really mattered Nintendo wouldn't still be in business and all the current consoles would be obsolete relics.
So, heresay or not, I couldn't care less about this.
Is it just me that thinks teraflops doesn't sound like a real unit?
Anyways, all that'll make the difference to me is which my mates all want as well. I think we'll all get xbox's again, none of us have had bad problems and the partying up/xbox live works great.
If there's anything impressive that the xbox couldnt handle I always have my pc.
Chances are though, for non-exclusives, I think 'faster' would be better than 'more powerful.' Wont companies just use pretty much the same graphics on both console releases for ease?
Anyways, all that'll make the difference to me is which my mates all want as well. I think we'll all get xbox's again, none of us have had bad problems and the partying up/xbox live works great.
If there's anything impressive that the xbox couldnt handle I always have my pc.
Chances are though, for non-exclusives, I think 'faster' would be better than 'more powerful.' Wont companies just use pretty much the same graphics on both console releases for ease?
To be fair, the 360 has more or less given up on exclusives aside from Halo and Gears. Sony kind of looks good by default.Gearhead mk2 said:
Anyway, I doubt anyone's bragging about 4 GB of RAM. At least, I seriously hope. Then again, compared to the 2 gigs of RAM in the Wii-U...Maybe they are.
I hope they brag about how their archetecture is so complicated that nobody will ever fully utilise it again. For the lulz, of course.geldonyetich said:
Depends on how you define "powerful". If it means "better able to play certain high end games" then yes, RAM will help out. It's well documented how the PS3's lack of RAM has affected performance in large open-world games like Skyrim. Giving that machine more RAM would give it the power to play more games (and would also reduce the restrictions on game developers).CyberAkuma said:
Reserving my judgment until all information doesn't come as a rumour. I mean honestly, two outright conflicting statements. Someone is being...untruthful. 0_0
I don't know about currently but, for a long time the graphical edge usually went to whatever the primary development console was. Just like a lot of other things, really. There's a decent chance there's going to be a similar phenomenon next gen, too. And it won't have anything to do with the power of the hardware, per se.Tropicaz said:
What looked better and played better on current gen consoles was largely based on which it had been optimised for. That will likely be influenced by sales figures more than anything. The 360 had a good lock on a lot of games early on with a year's lead in sales figures. Not every game, but a lot of them. I'm sure Sony's difficult hardware didn't help, either.
There's really no point in making two of these things. Just make an X Station PlayBox and be done with it already. The only people getting hurt by this ridiculous console war bullshit are the consumers, as always.
